Aydin durgunogluleslla2011

LITERACY DEVELOPMENT OF ADULTS

WITH LIMITED FORMAL EDUCATION

Aydin Yücesan Durgunoğlu

University of Minnesota Duluth

LESLLA 2011, Minneapolis

Since in 1996, program in Turkey for adults with

limited or no schooling.

Has reached 100,000+ learners, UNESCO

award

Based on research on cognitive and affective

dimensions of literacy development

includes literacy, numeracy and empowerment

components

mostly women, of all backgrounds, ages

volunteer instructors

professional development

mentoring

field support

Materials

Books (Level 1 and Level 2)

program continuously evaluated and books

revised

Outside materials, newspapers…

Online version, portal just opened

Back to USA

According to the 2000 census, more than 35 million are nonnative speakers of English

Majority are Spanish-speakers

Approximately 11 million adults (5% of the population) are nonliterate in English (but not necessarily in their L1)

In federally-funded adult education classes, 42% are in ESL classes

http://www.cal.org/caelanetwork/pd_resources/Foreign-Born.html

Burt, Peyton & Adams, 2003




Practical implications

Level of literacy closely tied to employment, income,

occupation

Chiswick (1991, 1998) reading and writing, rather than

speaking, “language capital”

Mother’s education strong predictor of child language

and literacy development (Snow, Barnes, Chandlar,

Goodman & Hemphill, 1991)

Heterogeneity

Different home languages

Highly varied educational levels in L1 (from no

schooling to postgraduate work)

Varied education in L2

Some born and/or mostly educated in US (Generation

1.5)

Burt, Peyton & Adams, 2003; Condelli, Wrigley & Yoon, 2009; Purcell-Gates,

Degener, Jacobson, and Soler, 2002; Strucker & Davidson, 2003; Thonus 2003;

Wrigley, Chen, White and Soroui, 2009

Very limited research base

Condelli & Wrigley (2004): 111 studies 17 fit the

criteria 2 about ESL and only one had an

unconfounded design

Torgerson, Brooks, Porthouse, Burton, Robinson,Wright

& Watt (2004): almost 5000 reports 33 studies with

controlled trial designsonly 3 with ESL as a focus.

Krudenier (2004): only 9 studies of adult ESL.

Adams and Burt (2002): adult LL research between

1980 and 2001 only 44 studies about adult English

LLs not in academic post-secondary programs (but

some were in English preparatory classes before

college)

Informed by research on:

Native speakers in Adult Basic Education

Second/Foreign Language Acquisition in high schools

and colleges

Language and literacy development of young LLs

Cognition and neuroscience of bilingualism

BUT…..Question of generalizability because of differences

in: age; educational context; SES

Bigelow and Tarone, 2004; Burt, Kreeft, Peyton & Van Duzer, 2005; Davidson & Strucker, 2002; Nanda & Morris, in press; Strucker, Yamamoto & Kirsch, 2007

Child literacy development in L2

LL and native speaker similarities

With good instruction, LLs = native speakers on word recognition, spelling and phonological processing

Similar predictors of decoding and spelling proficiencies for beginning readers (e.g., phonological awareness and concepts of print.)

Similar precursors, profiles of reading difficulties (not related to exposure or quality of instruction) and intervention effects August & Shanahan, 2006; Genesee, Lindholm-Leary, Saunders, Christian, 2006

Lovett, De Palma, Frijters, Steinbach, Temple, Benson, & Lacerenza, 2008

Child literacy development in L2 LL and native speaker similarities (pt. 2)

Rapid progress from preliterate to beginner

levels but face more challenges around Grades

3 and 4 as reading is used as a tool for

knowledge acquisition.

Benefit from direct instruction on phonological

awareness, decoding, vocabulary,

comprehension, writing

Academic English is different from

conversational English. Highlighting linguistic structures and formats in different content areas

Achugar & Schleppegrell, 2005; Collier, 1987; Goldenberg, 2008; Schleppegrell, 2007)


LL and native speaker differences

The gap between native speakers and LLs in

reading comprehension grows with grade

Having a strong literacy foundation in L1 helps

for English literacy development

Given the interconnectedness of oracy and

literacy, developing both skills simultaneously is

useful even in young language learners


LL and native speaker differences (pt. 2)

LLs are considerably behind native speakers on

reading comprehension tasks (underdeveloped

L2 oral proficiency and background knowledge).

LLs need support with oral language

development, especially vocabulary, syntax and

background-cultural knowledge.

Farver et al., 2009; Roberts & Neal, 2004; Slavin & Cheung, 2005

Adult Language Learners

Data from Durgunoglu et al. (unpublished)

Participants

Beginning level adult literacy/ESL students

Hmong (n=38) three sites in Minnesota

Spanish (n=77) two sites in Minnesota and Illinois

Procedure

Determining the existing characteristics of participants as they start their

classes

Interview (demographics, background, goals conducted in L1)

Language test (L2--English vocabulary)

Literacy tests (L1 and L2)

Hmong language

South East Asian language, spoken by people in Laos,

Thailand, Burma, Vietnam, China

Tonal like Chinese, but from a different language family

Subject-Verb-Object word order

No tense or case inflections, but noun classifiers

Alphabetized in 1850s by missionaries

Tones represented by the last letter of the word

tib high tone “to pile”

tij high but falling tone “older brother”

Literacy tests (in L1)

Word recognition

Hmong (researcher-created) 20 items

Spanish (Woodcock-Muñoz) 58 items

Spelling

Hmong (researcher-created) 12 items

Spanish (researcher-created) 12 items

Language and Literacy tests (in L2, English)

TOWRE sight words

TOWRE nonwords

WRAT spelling

Woodcock Language survey, productive vocabulary

Gates-MacGinitie reading comprehension

Level 1 Hmong (n=38) and Spanish1 (n=40) groups

Level 2 Spanish2 (n=37) group

Demographics

Hmong Spanish1 Spanish2

age 33.84(8.1) 31.53 (7.9) 32.76 (8.9)

Years in the US 6.12 (7.6) 9.73 (7.6) 8.74 (6.9)

No. of children 5.00 (2.9) 1.93 (1.4) 1.57 (1.5)

% female 42 55 57

Last grade

completed

4.14 (3.9) 10.08 (3.0) 8.56 (3.1)

L1 reading measures (in percentages)


word recognition 0.81 (.31) 0.97 (.04) 0.94 (0.6)

spelling 0.73 (0.3) 0.80 (.11) 0.83 (0.1)

Means (sds) of English measures


reading comp 17.18* (12.1) 27.18* (7.0) 12.51** (9.8)

vocabulary 16.39 (7.2) 17.83 (3.2) 15.20 (4.9)

WRAT spell 18.72 (6.9) 20.48 (4.1) 20.53 (3.8)

TOWRE Sight 21.34 (11.6) 48.45 (14.9) 41.89 (16.2)

TOWRE nw 8.09 (8.1) 30.60 (12.8) 28.53 (17.6)

Predictors of English reading comprehension—

Hmong group

Reading comprehension Test (level 1)

English predictors R2 beta

Steps

1. Vocabulary 28% -.007

2. TOWRE nonwords +15 -.001

3. WRAT spelling +17 .454*

4. TOWRE Sight words +7 .427*

Total 67%


Spanish1 group



Steps

1. Vocabulary 16% .340*

2. TOWRE nonwords +7 .111

3. WRAT spelling +1 .024

4. TOWRE Sight words +3 .239

Total 27%


Spanish2 group



Steps

1. Vocabulary 10% -.213

2. TOWRE nonwords +8 -.117

3. WRAT spelling +19 .606*

4. TOWRE Sight words +4 .428

Total 41%

Predictors of English word recognition (combined

TOWREs)—Hmong and combined Spanish

groups

Step Spanish Hmong

R2 beta R2 beta

1. L1 word recognition 13.5 .335* 35 .452*

2. English vocabulary +3.5 .193 5 .269

Total 17% 40%

Predictors of English spelling—Hmong and

combined Spanish groups

Step Spanish Hmong

R2 beta R2 beta

1. L1 word recognition 0 .008 35 .364*

2. English vocabulary 28 .532* +14 .441*

Total 28% 49%

Conclusions

Very low levels of reading comprehension and word recognition (approximately Grade 1 level) of the participants who are just starting the ESL/literacy courses

L1 word recognition for both Hmong and Spanish groups is related to English word recognition

L1’s similarity to English makes a difference, helps word recognition, but hinders spelling for Spanish speakers

Spelling is closely related to vocabulary performance, indicating that vocabulary development related to written language experience

Predictors of reading comprehension similar to what is found with children

Factors influencing adult L2

development (oral and written)

L1 educational experiences, L1 literacy,

L1 typology

One of the strongest predictors of outcomes Bigelow & Tarone, 2004; Condelli, Wrigley & Yoon, 2009; Fitzgerald & Young, 1997; Ross, 2000; Strucker & Davidson, 2003

Changes in cognitive processing with education Dellatolas, Braga, Souza, Filho, Queiroz & DeLoache, 2003; Stanovich, West and Harrison, 1995; Reis, Guerreiro & Petersson, 2003

Culture, education and cognition Ceci, 1991; Choi, Koo, & Choi, 2007; Choi, Nisbett, & Norenzayan, 1999; Nisbett, Peng,Choi, & Norenzayan, 2001; Norenzayan & Nisbett, 2000

L1 structure, writing system Akamatsu, 2003; Burt et al., 2003; Hamada & Koda, 2008; Hornberger, 1989;

Tokowicz & Macwhinney, 2005; Ziegler & Goswami, 2005

Existing English proficiency

Decoding

develops rapidly, tied to L1 literacy

Vocabulary (depth, breadth, quality)

Higher L2 vocabulary, more progress in children

Importance of exposure, incidental learning

~3000 words minimum, ~9000 for college level

Cultural context, prior knowledge, academic

language Alamperese, 2009 Brantmeier, 2005; Droop & Verhoeven, 1998; Kieffer, 2008; Lesaux, Koda, Siegel & Shanahan, 2006; Perfetti & Hart, 2002; Wrigley, Chen, White and Soroui, 2009; Zareva, Schwanenflugel & Nikolova, 2006

Learner motivation and sociocultural context

Motivation, persistence, attendance are related, but the

effects on the outcomes are not very well known

1. sense of belonging and community

2. clarity of purpose (goals and progress)

3. agency (relying one oneself)

4. competence (self efficacy through mastery)

5. relevance (perceived relevance and connection)

6. stability, safe and structured environment

Additional issues of cultural integration, level of immersion in the new culture, ties to home culture

Alamperese, 200; Comings 2007; Condelli, Wrigley & Yoon, 2009; Masgoret & Gardner, 2003; Nash & Kallenbach, 2009

Instructional implications--Cognitive

For literacy development, similar cognitive

underpinnings and similar characteristics of

good instruction for native speakers and LLs.

L1 support is helpful if available and feasible

Instructional implications--affective

use real world applications and documents

make it relevant and useful e.g., adolescents perform certain literacy tasks very well outside of school

make it a safe, supportive and comfortable environment

encourage collaborative work, peer support

know the learners’ goals, needs, strengths and challenges Burt et al., 2003; Condelli & Wrigley, 2004; Gregg, Hull & Moje 2009; Hardman, 1999; Purcell-Gates et al 2002; Taylor, Abasi, Pinsent-Johnson & Evans, 2007; Torgerson, 2003; Watanabe &Swain, 2007

Instructional implications—language

development

language AND content instruction

Integrated instruction

oral and written language

decoding and comprehension

(From monolingual research) higher order

comprehension skills necessary for reading can

also be developed through listening and visual

exercises Condelli Wrigley 2004; Cumming & Riazi, 2000; Kendeou, Bohn-Gettler, White, & van den Broek, 2008; Strucker & Davidson, 2002; Wrigley, 2007

Instructional implications—language

development (pt.2)

Perspectives from Second/Foreign Language

Teaching

Task Based Language Teaching (TBLT)

Long & Crookes, 1992; Long, 2009

Task-based, active, learning-by-doing, through

interaction

Sensitive to learners’ needs, goals and developmental

levels

Genuine materials, rich input (not simplified but clarified

through elaboration, chronological restructuring etc.)

Taking into consideration both explicit and implicit

knowledge of language (e.g., conscious knowledge of

rules vs. noticing statistical patterns)

Not mere exposure to meaning, but focus on

both form and meaning

Explicit feedback (recasting works but may not

be enough)

Explicit teaching and guidance of attention,

especially when linguistic cues are not very

salient or do not exist in learner’s L1.

Less is known about effectiveness of TBLT in

different learner contexts, for different linguistic

structures and for different types of assessments

Ellis, Loewen & Erlam, 2006; Long & Crookes, 1992; Long, 2009; Nassaji, 2009; Nicholas, Lightbown, & Spada, 2001; Norris & Ortega, 2000; Robinson & Ellis, 2008

Writing

Writing proficiency develops as a function of

language proficiency, so it can be a window to

language development

Hard to model its development because many

factors in adult L2 writing:

variability in L1 background, educational level, L2

proficiency, length of time in the new country,

acculturation and familiarity with the L2 writing contexts,

the purposes and needs for writing, learners’ past

experiences and personal preferences Cumming & Riazi, 2000; Sasaki & Hirose, 1996

L1 and L2 writing processes are fundamentally

similar

L1 resources are used in L2 writing

Those less skilled in L2 tend to devote more

attention to form (e.g., finding the right L2 word

or syntactic structure, translating from L1), and

less attention to idea generation, planning,

revising, editing Sasaki, 2000

Some promising techniques for

teaching L2 writing

Explicitly instruction about macro processes of

writing

providing scaffolding and support (e.g., pre-

discussions, peer response, teacher-student

dialogue journals)

modeling writing, setting own goals

Berg, 1999; Peyton & Seyoum, 1989; Sasaki, 2000

Language exposure and learning

outside of the classroom

Some LLs live in isolated communities with

limited exposure to English

Providing opportunities to hear and use

language outside of the classroom

Long, personal communication; Reder, 2009

National Academy of Sciences Taskforce on

Adolescent and Adult Literacy

Two year effort to review the available

information and make recommendations

Report now available for free

downloading:

http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13242

Improving Adult Literacy

Instruction:

Options for Practice and Research

Committee on Learning Sciences: Foundations and Implications for Adolescent and Adult Literacy

Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

National Research Council

Organization of the Report

Chapter 1 Introduction

Chapter 2 Foundations of Reading and Writing

Chapter 3 Literacy Instruction for Adults

Chapter 4 Principles of Learning for Instructional Design

Chapter 5 Motivation, Engagement, and Persistence

Chapter 6 Technology to Promote Adult Literacy

Chapter 7 Learning, Reading, and Writing Disabilities

Chapter 8 Literacy Development of English Language

Learners

Chapter 9 Conclusions and Recommendations

Adult Learners and Learning

Environments

Conclusion 1. The population of adult learners is heterogeneous.

Optimal reading and writing instruction will therefore vary according

to goals for literacy development and learning, knowledge and skill,

interests, neurocognitive profiles, and cultural and linguistic

backgrounds.

The contexts in which adults receive literacy instruction also are

highly variable with respect to (1) place and purpose of instruction,

(2) literacy development aims and practices, and (3) instructor

preparation.

Principles of Effective Literacy

Instruction

Conclusion 2. Effective literacy instruction:

targets (as needed) the component processes of literacy: word recognition, fluency, vocabulary, reading comprehension, background knowledge, strategies for deeper analysis and understanding of texts, and the component skills of writing;

Involves explicit teaching and extensive practice that is motivating and that uses varied texts, tools, and tasks matched to the learner’s skills, educational and cultural backgrounds, literacy needs and goals;

explicitly targets the automation and integration of component skills and the transfer of skills to tasks valued by society and the learner; and

includes formative assessments to monitor progress, provide feedback, and adjust instruction.


Instruction

Conclusion 3. Although findings from research on effective literacy instruction for adults is lacking, research with younger populations can guide the development of instructional approaches for adults if the instruction is modified to account for two major differences between adults and younger populations:

(1) adults may experience age-related neurocognitive declines that affect reading and writing processes and speed of learning

(2) adults have varied and more substantial life experiences and knowledge, and they have different motivations for learning that need attention in instructional design.

Research with adult literacy learners is required to validate, identify the boundaries of, and extend current knowledge to identify how best to meet the particular literacy development needs of well-defined subgroups of adults.


Instruction

Conclusion 4. Literacy development is a complex skill that requires thousands of hours of practice to reach the levels needed for full opportunity in modern life, yet many adults do not persist long enough in adult education programs or developmental education courses.

Many factors—instructional, cognitive, economic, social—affect persistence. At

present, research does not indicate which methods are most effective in supporting adults’ persistence and engagement with instruction.

Expertise requires 3,000-10,000 hours of practice. Reading is a form of expertise. 75 min/day from K through 12 equals about 3000 hours. Durations in adult literacy classes are in the range of about 100 hours. Major increases in effective intervention generally are needed.

Enough is known, from research on motivation, literacy, and learning with other populations to suggest how to design motivating instructional environments, create more time for practice, and ensure that the time is efficiently used. The efficacy of these approaches will need to be tested rigorously.

English Language Learners

Conclusion 5. The component skills of reading and writing in

English and the principles of effective literacy instruction derived

from research with native English speakers are likely to apply to

English language learners.

Consistent with principles of learning, effective instruction must

(1) meet the particular skill development needs of English

learners, which differ in several respects from the needs of

native speakers, and

(2) utilize existing knowledge of content, language, and

literacy whether in the native or the English language.

Assessment

Conclusion 6. Improved adult literacy instruction requires the development of measures and comprehensive systems of assessment that

• are valid: include measures of language and literacy skills related to a range of literacy forms and tasks, domain knowledge, cognitive abilities, and valued functional as well as psychological outcomes

• are instructionally useful: include measures for differentiated placement and instruction, diagnosis, formative assessment, and accountability that are all aligned to work toward common learning goals

• are useful for policy and accountability: produce information at learner, classroom, and program levels that is useful to learners, instructors, program administrators, and policy makers.

Technology

Conclusion 7. Technologies for learning can help adult

learners overcome time and space constraints and may help

institutions afford more substantial adult literacy instruction.

Technology can assist with multiple aspects of learning and

assessment that include diagnosis, feedback, scaffolding,

embedded practice with skills in meaningful tasks, tracking of

learner progress, and accommodations to create more

effective and efficient instruction.

Given the costs of human labor, technology also may offer a

more cost-effective means of achieving the extended levels

of practice needed to gain reading and writing facility.

Technology

Conclusion 8. Society increasingly requires broader, more

intensive and more complex forms of literacy given new

communication technologies. Adults need to be able to use

contemporary tools of literacy and become facile with forms

of reading and writing that are valued and expected for

education, work, health maintenance, social and civic

participation, and other life tasks.

Adult Literacy Instruction: State of the

Evidence

Conclusion 9. There is a lack of research and data of the kind required to better define, prevent, and remediate problems that adolescents and adults enrolled in instruction outside compulsory schooling are experiencing with developing their literacy skills in the United States.

Sustained and systematic research is needed to:

• identify instructional approaches that show promise of maximizing adults’ literacy skill gains

• develop scalable instructional programs and rigorously test their effectiveness

• conduct further testing to determine for whom and under what conditions those approaches work.

Questions? Comments?

Thank you!

Aydin durgunogluleslla2011

Education

Transcript of Aydin durgunogluleslla2011